Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Cosmic distance ladder wikipedia , lookup
Outer space wikipedia , lookup
Stellar evolution wikipedia , lookup
Nucleosynthesis wikipedia , lookup
Shape of the universe wikipedia , lookup
Big Bang nucleosynthesis wikipedia , lookup
Expansion of the universe wikipedia , lookup
Cosmic microwave background wikipedia , lookup
Flatness problem wikipedia , lookup
S E E TATEMENTS of CIENCE and CRIPTURE XHIBITED XAMINED XPLAINED DUCATIONAL DIFYING VANGELICAL Presented by Dr Thomas J Kindell Founder & President of Reasons for Faith Ministries, Inc. “Be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is within you” I Peter 3:15 DESIGN IN THE UNIVERSE… BIG BANG OR DIVINE CREATION? For in six days the Lord made the heavens, the earth, the sea and all that is in them… Exodus 20:11 The Big Bang “Fifteen to twenty billion years ago a big bang, or explosion, occurred, creating the universe. The universe began as an infinitely dense, hot fireball, a scrambling of space and time.” The Handy Space Answer Book, 1998 BIG BANG PROBLEMS PRESENT DAY COSMIC EGG Starts with the cosmic egg EVERYTHING THAT HAD A BEGINNING REQUIRES A CAUSE TO EXPLAIN ITS ORIGIN 1. The Universe (including time itself) can be shown to have had a beginning. 2. It is unreasonable to believe something could begin to exist without a cause. 3. The Universe therefore requires a cause. 4. God, as Creator of time, is outside of time. Since therefore He has no beginning in time, He has always existed, so doesn’t need a cause. NOTHING – THE PREFERRED CAUSE It is tempting to go one step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing. Allan H. Guth & Paul J Steinhardt ...that our Universe had its physical origin as a quantum fluctuation of some pre-existing true vacuum or state of nothingness. Edward Tryon This “quantum cosmology” provides a loophole for the universe to, so to speak, spring into existence from nothing, without violating any laws of physics. Paul Davies The Big Bang Paul Davies, physicist and evolutionist, in his book - The Edge of Infinity, describes the big bang this way: “[The big bang] represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come out of nothing. It represents a true miracle…” Why is this more scientific than In the beginning God created? BIG BANG PROBLEMS PRESENT DAY COSMIC EGG No anti-matter No heavy elements “The standard Big Bang model does not give rise to lumpiness. That model assumes the universe started out as a globally smooth, homogenous expanding gas. If you apply the laws of physics to this model, you get a universe that is uniform, a cosmic vastness of evenly distributed atoms with no organization of any kind…” Philip E. Seiden, Cited by Ben Patrusky, “Why is the Cosmos Lumpy?”, Science 81, pg. 96 Star Formation and Physics The popular theory is that stars form from vast clouds of gas and dust through gravitational contraction. Nebula Gas and dust clouds will expand NOT contract Star Nurseries Do pictures confirm stars are forming? EAGLE NEBULA Star Nurseries “Stars are still forming today. About 1500 light-years away lies the Orion Nebula: enough gas and dust to make millions of stars…. It even contains protostars that are still condensing …” Martin Rees (A leading researcher on cosmic evolution), Before the Beginning, 1998, p. 19. Star Formation and Nebula Images taken by the European Southern Observatory Very Large Telescope in January 2002 of the Horsehead Nebula in Orion verified that the structures are Anglo-Australian Observatory, Photograph by David Malin Star Nurseries Ron Cowen, “Rethinking an Astronomical Icon: The Eagle’s EGG, Not So Fertile,” Science News, Vol. 161, 16 March 2002, pp. 171–172. “NASA’s claim in 1995 that these pictures showed hundreds to thousands of stars forming was based on the speculative ‘EGG-star formation theory.’ It has recently been tested independently with two infrared detectors that can see inside the dusty pillars. What did they find? Few stars were there, and 85% of the pillars had too little dust and gas to support star formation. ‘The new findings also highlight how much astronomers still have to learn about star formation.’ No star nurseries “Astrophysicists also have developed plausible hypotheses concerning the formation of galaxies, individual stars, and planetary systems. The sun and planets in our solar system are believed to have been formed by condensations from an interstellar cloud of dust and gas like those now visible in parts of our galaxy…the condensation resulting in our solar system was initiated by a nearby exploding star (or supernova)…” Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington DC (1984), pp. 3-19 “Most disturbing, however, is the fact that despite numerous efforts, we have yet to directly observe the process of stellar formation. We have not yet been able to unambiguously detect the collapse of a molecular cloud core or the infall of circumstellar material onto an embryonic star. Until such an observation is made, it would probably be prudent to regard our current hypotheses and theoretical scenarios with some degree of suspicion.” C. J. Lada and F. H. Shu, “Star Formation: From OB Associations to Protostars,” IAU Symposium 115, pg. 1 “The universe we see when we look out to its furthest horizons contains a hundred billion galaxies. Each of these galaxies contains another hundred billion stars. That’s 1022 stars all told. The silent embarrassment of modern astrophysics is that we do not know how even a single one of these stars managed to form.” Martin Harwitt, Book Reviews, Science, Vol. 231, pp. 1201-1202 Conclusion on Star Formation Abraham Loeb, (Harvard Center for Astrophysics), quoted by Marcus Chown, “Let there be Light”, New Scientist, Feb 7, 1998, “The truth is that we don’t understand star formation at a fundamental level.” Formation of Galaxies Joseph Silk (Professor of Astronomy at the University of Oxford), The Big Bang, 2001, p. 195. “Many aspects of the evolution of galaxies cannot yet be determined with any certainty.” “The problem of explaining the existence of galaxies has proved to be one of the thorniest in cosmology. By all rights, they just shouldn’t be there, yet there they sit. It’s hard to convey the depth of frustration that this simple fact induces among scientists.” James Trefill, The Dark Side of the Universe (New York: Charles Scribners’s Sons), pg. 55 “But there are plenty of mysteries left, many of them discussed by other authors in this issue. Of what kind of matter are galaxies and galactic clusters made? How did the stars, planets and galaxies form?” Steven Weinberg, “Life in the Universe,” Scientific American, October 1994, pg. 35 “This [big bang] picture of the universe…is in agreement with all the observational evidence that we have today…Nevertheless, it leaves a number of important questions unanswered…[including] (the origin of stars and galaxies).” Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, 10th edition, 1998 MR BIG BANG SAYS. . . MR BIG BANG SAYS. . . It’s just the origin of the stars and galaxies that I’m having trouble with! “Thus, the existence of life of any kind seems to require a cancellation between different contributions to the vacuum energy, accurate to about 120 decimal places. It is possible that this cancellation will be explained in terms of some future theory. So far, in string theory as well as in quantum field theory, the vacuum energy involves arbitrary constants, which must be carefully adjusted [by chance?] to make the total vacuum energy small enough for life to be possible.” Steven Weinberg, “Life in the Universe,” Scientific American, October 1994, pg. 49 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them like a tent to dwell in. Isaiah 40:22 He counts the number of the stars; He gives names to all of them. Psalm 147:4 Gravity distorts space-time Space-Time Distortion The Affect of Gravity on Time Fast Slow Redshift of Starlight Light Spectrum UV Blue Moving toward Red IR Moving away Redshifts are used to describe the expansion of the universe – the distance of a galaxy from the earth due to the stretching of the light waves. Compressed (blue side) Stretched (red side) Edwin Hubble Redshift Interpretation Galaxy 1 Galaxy 2 Galaxy 3 Blue Red We should observe redshifts at all distances along the light spectrum (big bang model) Redshift Values Blue What we observe Blue Red Big bang model predicts a homogeneous universe Red Distinct quanta (1-million light year intervals) Dr. D. Russell Humphries “Our galaxy is the centre of the universe, ‘quantized’ red shifts show” www.answersingenesis.org “Such a condition [these red shifts] would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe,…But the unwelcome supposition of a favored location must be avoided at all costs…[it] is intolerable…moreover, it represents a discrepancy with the [big bang] theory because the theory postulates homogeneity.” E. Hubble, The Observational Approach to Cosmology, Clarendon, Oxford, 1937 1984 “There is now very firm evidence that redshifts of galaxies are quantized. . .” W. G. Tifft and W. J. Cocke, “Global Redshift Quantization,” Astrophysical Journal, 1984 “The fact that measured values of redshifts do not vary continuously but come in steps – certain preferred values – is so unexpected that conventional astronomy has never been able to accept it, in spite of the overwhelming observational evidence.” Halton Arp (staff astronomer at Mt. Wilson and Palomar observatories for 29 years), Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies, 1987, p. 195 “Quantized redshifts just don’t fit into this view of the cosmos, for they imply concentric shells of galaxies expanding away from a central point – earth! Even though more recent redshift data have supported the notion of quantized redshifts, cosmologists find them undigestible, even pathogenic.” “Quantized Redshifts: What’s Going on Here?” Sky and Telescope, 84:128, 1992 “. . .the redshift distribution has been found to be strongly quantized in the galactocentric frame of reference. The phenomenon is easily seen by eye and apparently cannot be ascribed to statistical artifacts, selection procedures or flawed reduction techniques.” W. Napler and B. Guthrie, “Quantized Redshifts: A Status Report,” Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 1997 “Perhaps because of this clarity, or because of the confirming studies by other astronomers, critics seem to have stopped questioning the validity of the data. It appears that redshift quantization – the phenomenon itself, not the theories trying to explain it – has survived a quarter-century of peer review.” Dr. D. Russell Humpries, “Our galaxy is the centre of the universe, ‘quantized’ red shifts show” George Ellis People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations, Ellis argues. “For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” Ellis has published a paper on this. “You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” Profile: George Ellis, Scientific American, October 1995 Billions of years Six Days - Earth Standard Time “Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us.” Carl Sagan Audio CD Albums